Search
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated The Banker's Wife in Books
Mar 6, 2019
Great, exciting, tense novel
Annabel Lerner feels isolated in Geneva: she's not like the other bankers' wives, and she rarely sees her husband Matthew anymore. They moved to Geneva for a fresh start--and yes, to take advantage of the salary Matthew's private banking job at Swiss United offered. But Annabel never realized how stressed Matthew would be or how often he'd travel. And then, suddenly, he's gone: his private plane simply falling off the radar over the French Alps. Before she can even understand what's happening, Annabel is left to deal with the aftermath, including a trail of secrets and the powerful men at Swiss United who don't want them exposed. Meanwhile, Marina Tourneau is a reporter for The Press. Her mentor, Duncan Carr, has been chasing a story involving Morty Reiss, whose hedge fund was one of the largest Ponzi scams of all time. Supposedly, before he could get caught, Morty committed suicide. But Duncan and Marina believe Marty faked his death and Duncan has become obsessed with proving it--to the detriment of his health, his reputation, and his career. But Marina is also engaged to Grant Ellis, whose wealthy father, James, is about to run for President. The plan is for Marina to stop writing and stand by her man. But when she suddenly realizes she's on the trail of the story of her career, what will she do?
Well, this turned out to be a gem of a novel. When I first started reading it, I was a little worried that I wouldn't see what the fuss was all about, but things quickly picked up, and I was hooked. One of the best things about this novel is that it's an old-style thriller--it reminded me of old-school Grisham or Stieg Larsson. It even throws shade at the glutton of Girl books and their (annoying) unreliable narrators, which I love. This is a mystery for folks who love real stories without any fuss or distraction and with strong characters--all of which combine to leave you befuddled and anxious as everything slowly unfurls.
Alger takes us into the complicated and dark world of Swiss banking, where we are introduced to a lot of real bad guys who have no morals. You can't trust them, you know they are bad, and you know your heroes and heroines are in true danger. Rarely do I think this while reading a book (because, face it, the book is always better), but I really think this book would *actually* make a great movie. It's exciting and tense, and the way things are slowly revealed would make for a very effective film.
But, anyway, it's a wonderful novel. You quickly get sucked into Annabel and Marina's worlds--the majority of the story is told from their points of view. There's a decent amount of ancillary characters to keep track of, but it's certainly manageable. The best is not knowing who to trust, what to believe, or how things went down. There's that Girl with a Dragon Tattoo-reporting vibe that I love: the pleasure of solving a case. The story is set in 2015 but is completely timely, yet utterly timeless in its essence of greed, money, and fear--and what people do in the name of all three. I just loved the old-fashioned thrill of it, the long list of suspects, the excitement of trying to work out who did what.
Overall, this is just a great novel. The plot is excellent--tense, exciting, and expertly woven together. The characters are strong, but it's really the story that's the standout here. It truly reminds you of mysteries and thrillers of old (I sound ancient here, but whatever). Don't let the banking theme scare you off: this is a fabulous read, and if you're a mystery or thriller fan, I think you'll really enjoy this one. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Well, this turned out to be a gem of a novel. When I first started reading it, I was a little worried that I wouldn't see what the fuss was all about, but things quickly picked up, and I was hooked. One of the best things about this novel is that it's an old-style thriller--it reminded me of old-school Grisham or Stieg Larsson. It even throws shade at the glutton of Girl books and their (annoying) unreliable narrators, which I love. This is a mystery for folks who love real stories without any fuss or distraction and with strong characters--all of which combine to leave you befuddled and anxious as everything slowly unfurls.
Alger takes us into the complicated and dark world of Swiss banking, where we are introduced to a lot of real bad guys who have no morals. You can't trust them, you know they are bad, and you know your heroes and heroines are in true danger. Rarely do I think this while reading a book (because, face it, the book is always better), but I really think this book would *actually* make a great movie. It's exciting and tense, and the way things are slowly revealed would make for a very effective film.
But, anyway, it's a wonderful novel. You quickly get sucked into Annabel and Marina's worlds--the majority of the story is told from their points of view. There's a decent amount of ancillary characters to keep track of, but it's certainly manageable. The best is not knowing who to trust, what to believe, or how things went down. There's that Girl with a Dragon Tattoo-reporting vibe that I love: the pleasure of solving a case. The story is set in 2015 but is completely timely, yet utterly timeless in its essence of greed, money, and fear--and what people do in the name of all three. I just loved the old-fashioned thrill of it, the long list of suspects, the excitement of trying to work out who did what.
Overall, this is just a great novel. The plot is excellent--tense, exciting, and expertly woven together. The characters are strong, but it's really the story that's the standout here. It truly reminds you of mysteries and thrillers of old (I sound ancient here, but whatever). Don't let the banking theme scare you off: this is a fabulous read, and if you're a mystery or thriller fan, I think you'll really enjoy this one. 4+ stars.
I received a copy of this novel from the publisher and Netgalley in return for an unbiased review (thank you!).
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Lockout (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
In the later part of the 21st-century the worst criminals the planet has to offer are kept safely away from public in stasis aboard an orbiting prison known as MS: One. Although it is never explained in the film, it does not take a rocket scientist to guess that “MS” stands for Maximum Security and much like the rest of the movie “Lockout”, this is a film that does not aspire to be more than the sum of its heavily borrowed parts.
The film stars Guy Pearce as Snow, a special agent who has been wrongly accused in the killing of a high-ranking operative. Railroaded through the system, Snow is looking at a lengthy sentence.
At the same time, the presidents daughter Emily (Maggie Grace), has visited MS: One on a goodwill tour. One of her special causes is to confirm the truth that long-term stasis has damaging psychological and neurological effects for the prisoners. Since the prison is funded by a deep space research development she definitely sees conflict of interest in how prisoners are being treated.
Things take a turn for the worse when a violent prisoner goes off during his interview and proceeds to release pent-up inmate population and take the crew hostage. The prisoners run amok and for the time being are unaware that they had president’s daughter in their midst. Snow was given an ultimatum that the successful retrieval of the first daughter will help him avoid becoming a future resident of the orbiting prison.
Despite his misgivings, Snow accepts the assignment as he learns that one of his friends is incarcerated on board. This friend holds valuable information that can exonerates Snow from his charges. Once on board the station, Snow must battle mobs of psychopaths as he attempts to locate and rescue Emily.
While one would think this premise would hold plenty of excitement, thrills, and suspense, the film is essentially undone by its inability to sustain any real momentum for any developed and real tension.
While the prisoners do a great job of appearing menacing, torturing and killing the hostages, we really never learn of their true objective. At no time do they really make any serious demands for freedom, material goods, and so on which basically leaves them vulnerable to an all-out attack from the amassing forces around the prison.
One would think they would’ve asked for something as simple as pardons but they seem more interested in glaring threats to the president and the authorities via videoconference, not truly grasping the magnitude of their situation.
Pearce does a good job as the gruff Snow but sadly the script gives him very little to do other than smug one-liners and occasionally shoot the bad guys. Smith does show some spark and personality in her performance but she is given little to do aside from playing the damsel in distress although she doesn infuse the role with some strength and humor.
What really surprised me about the movie was even though it borrowed very heavily from Fortress 1 & 2 as well as an escape from New York, and have surprisingly little new to offer. It was clear that the intention was to create a diehard style film in space but unfortunately it fell relatively flat.
This was a huge surprise to me as one would think that Luc Besson and many of the creative talents that made “Taken” such a thrilling smash would have been able to come up with a better action film.
This is not to say that “Lockout” is a bad film more than it is a disappointment considering the premise, cast, and the potential that it had going for it.
I can certainly overlook plot holes, thinly crafted stock characters, and run-of-the-mill action sequences in my action films as long as they can get me some solid entertainment.
Sadly this is not the case and it plays out more like a direct to DVD release that’s certainly would be extremely welcome us and Netflix are red box rental but for my taste thanks to the lo-res and dated special effects did not warrant a major theatrical release.
The film stars Guy Pearce as Snow, a special agent who has been wrongly accused in the killing of a high-ranking operative. Railroaded through the system, Snow is looking at a lengthy sentence.
At the same time, the presidents daughter Emily (Maggie Grace), has visited MS: One on a goodwill tour. One of her special causes is to confirm the truth that long-term stasis has damaging psychological and neurological effects for the prisoners. Since the prison is funded by a deep space research development she definitely sees conflict of interest in how prisoners are being treated.
Things take a turn for the worse when a violent prisoner goes off during his interview and proceeds to release pent-up inmate population and take the crew hostage. The prisoners run amok and for the time being are unaware that they had president’s daughter in their midst. Snow was given an ultimatum that the successful retrieval of the first daughter will help him avoid becoming a future resident of the orbiting prison.
Despite his misgivings, Snow accepts the assignment as he learns that one of his friends is incarcerated on board. This friend holds valuable information that can exonerates Snow from his charges. Once on board the station, Snow must battle mobs of psychopaths as he attempts to locate and rescue Emily.
While one would think this premise would hold plenty of excitement, thrills, and suspense, the film is essentially undone by its inability to sustain any real momentum for any developed and real tension.
While the prisoners do a great job of appearing menacing, torturing and killing the hostages, we really never learn of their true objective. At no time do they really make any serious demands for freedom, material goods, and so on which basically leaves them vulnerable to an all-out attack from the amassing forces around the prison.
One would think they would’ve asked for something as simple as pardons but they seem more interested in glaring threats to the president and the authorities via videoconference, not truly grasping the magnitude of their situation.
Pearce does a good job as the gruff Snow but sadly the script gives him very little to do other than smug one-liners and occasionally shoot the bad guys. Smith does show some spark and personality in her performance but she is given little to do aside from playing the damsel in distress although she doesn infuse the role with some strength and humor.
What really surprised me about the movie was even though it borrowed very heavily from Fortress 1 & 2 as well as an escape from New York, and have surprisingly little new to offer. It was clear that the intention was to create a diehard style film in space but unfortunately it fell relatively flat.
This was a huge surprise to me as one would think that Luc Besson and many of the creative talents that made “Taken” such a thrilling smash would have been able to come up with a better action film.
This is not to say that “Lockout” is a bad film more than it is a disappointment considering the premise, cast, and the potential that it had going for it.
I can certainly overlook plot holes, thinly crafted stock characters, and run-of-the-mill action sequences in my action films as long as they can get me some solid entertainment.
Sadly this is not the case and it plays out more like a direct to DVD release that’s certainly would be extremely welcome us and Netflix are red box rental but for my taste thanks to the lo-res and dated special effects did not warrant a major theatrical release.
Bob Mann (459 KP) rated Jungle Cruise (2021) in Movies
Aug 2, 2021
Star power from Johnson and Blunt (1 more)
Direction, cinematography, special effects and score all top notch
An Amazon-based blockbuster that delivers!
Dating from 1955, Jungle Cruise was one of the key attractions at Disneyland when it first opened. Full of corny spiel from the lovable boat captains, the experience is nicely evoked in the new Disney movie: a true summer blockbuster that delights.
Positives:
- Cut the movie open and it reads "summer blockbuster pleaser" through the middle. This is largely down to the charisma of its two stars, Blunt and Johnson, who prove why they are both such bankable commodities. It's clearly based on the "will they/won't they" simmering sexual chemistry between two polar-opposites, as featured in movies such as "Romancing the Stone" and "The African Queen". (Since the theme park ride was heavily influenced by the latter, this is no surprise). But there's also a heavy dose of tongue-in-cheek ridiculousness as featured in other great B-movie homages such as "The Mummy" and (most notably) "Raiders of the Lost Ark". (A few scenes directly mimic the Indiana Jones movies.)
- The supporting cast also have fun with their roles. Jack Whitehouse, doing almost a like-for-like copy of John Hannah's character in "The Mummy", could have been extremely annoying. But although he's the comic relief in the piece, he steers it just the right side of farcical, avoiding Jar-Jar Binks territory. ("When in Rome" he declares, swallowing a flagon of fermented spit. "God - I wish I was in Rome"!) Jesse Plemons, one of my favourite actors, who proved his comic chops in "Game Night", here delivers one of the most over-the-top Nazis since Ronald Lacey's Toht in "Raiders". Rounding things off is Paul Giamatti with a bizarrely comic performance as Nilo, a competing riverboat owner.
- Special effects, cinematography (Flavio Martínez Labiano, of "The Shallows") and James Newton-Howard's score all add to the lush blockbuster feel of the movie. And director Jaume Collet-Serra (who did the clever shark B-movie "The Shallows") keeps the movie clipping along at a fine rate, with only a few sections of character-building dialogue to get the kids fidgety.
Negatives:
- I mean, it's popcorn nonsense of course. The Amazonian 'McGuffin' is a tree that only comes to life under very specific conditions. And isn't it amazing that watery machinery (developed by who?) still works after at least 400 years, when my dishwasher gives up after ten? (But it's done with verve and style, so who cares?)
- Although the screenplay is actually very slick for a movie of this type, it feels like a script by committee at times. A single writer might have been tempted to duck the Hollywood ending and leave things on a more thoughtful, albeit downbeat, note.
Summary Thoughts on "Jungle Cruise": This was a pleasant surprise for me. A fun and light-hearted movie that ticks all the boxes as a summer blockbuster. It nicely evokes the cheesiness of the theme park ride operator (past alumni have included Robin Williams and Kevin Costner), especially with Johnson's opening scenes. But then rounds it out as a spectacular and appealing tongue-in-cheek adventure.
And, by the way, in case you fancy sitting through the interminable end titles to watch a post-credits scene.... there isn't one.
(#takenonefortheteam).
Parental Guidance: One question might be whether, with a "12A" certificate, this summer blockbuster is one that your kids might enjoy or be freaked out by. A comparison with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is perhaps useful here. There are quite a number of "jolts" involving snakes and bees but probably not as bad as the ones you get in an uncut version of "Raiders" (think the spiked Satipo; the mummies/snakes when escaping the 'Well of Souls'; and the melting Nazi bad-guys). So if you have kids that lapped up that stuff then I don't think they would have any issues with this one.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks).
Positives:
- Cut the movie open and it reads "summer blockbuster pleaser" through the middle. This is largely down to the charisma of its two stars, Blunt and Johnson, who prove why they are both such bankable commodities. It's clearly based on the "will they/won't they" simmering sexual chemistry between two polar-opposites, as featured in movies such as "Romancing the Stone" and "The African Queen". (Since the theme park ride was heavily influenced by the latter, this is no surprise). But there's also a heavy dose of tongue-in-cheek ridiculousness as featured in other great B-movie homages such as "The Mummy" and (most notably) "Raiders of the Lost Ark". (A few scenes directly mimic the Indiana Jones movies.)
- The supporting cast also have fun with their roles. Jack Whitehouse, doing almost a like-for-like copy of John Hannah's character in "The Mummy", could have been extremely annoying. But although he's the comic relief in the piece, he steers it just the right side of farcical, avoiding Jar-Jar Binks territory. ("When in Rome" he declares, swallowing a flagon of fermented spit. "God - I wish I was in Rome"!) Jesse Plemons, one of my favourite actors, who proved his comic chops in "Game Night", here delivers one of the most over-the-top Nazis since Ronald Lacey's Toht in "Raiders". Rounding things off is Paul Giamatti with a bizarrely comic performance as Nilo, a competing riverboat owner.
- Special effects, cinematography (Flavio Martínez Labiano, of "The Shallows") and James Newton-Howard's score all add to the lush blockbuster feel of the movie. And director Jaume Collet-Serra (who did the clever shark B-movie "The Shallows") keeps the movie clipping along at a fine rate, with only a few sections of character-building dialogue to get the kids fidgety.
Negatives:
- I mean, it's popcorn nonsense of course. The Amazonian 'McGuffin' is a tree that only comes to life under very specific conditions. And isn't it amazing that watery machinery (developed by who?) still works after at least 400 years, when my dishwasher gives up after ten? (But it's done with verve and style, so who cares?)
- Although the screenplay is actually very slick for a movie of this type, it feels like a script by committee at times. A single writer might have been tempted to duck the Hollywood ending and leave things on a more thoughtful, albeit downbeat, note.
Summary Thoughts on "Jungle Cruise": This was a pleasant surprise for me. A fun and light-hearted movie that ticks all the boxes as a summer blockbuster. It nicely evokes the cheesiness of the theme park ride operator (past alumni have included Robin Williams and Kevin Costner), especially with Johnson's opening scenes. But then rounds it out as a spectacular and appealing tongue-in-cheek adventure.
And, by the way, in case you fancy sitting through the interminable end titles to watch a post-credits scene.... there isn't one.
(#takenonefortheteam).
Parental Guidance: One question might be whether, with a "12A" certificate, this summer blockbuster is one that your kids might enjoy or be freaked out by. A comparison with "Raiders of the Lost Ark" is perhaps useful here. There are quite a number of "jolts" involving snakes and bees but probably not as bad as the ones you get in an uncut version of "Raiders" (think the spiked Satipo; the mummies/snakes when escaping the 'Well of Souls'; and the melting Nazi bad-guys). So if you have kids that lapped up that stuff then I don't think they would have any issues with this one.
(For the full graphical review, please check out One Mann's Movies on the web, Facebook or Tiktok. Thanks).
Kristin (2 KP) rated Amazon Kindle in Apps
Mar 4, 2019
Ability to bookmark your page (4 more)
Customizable viewing
Book suggestions based on what's in your library
Easily navigate through your library by scrolling through titles, or search for what you're looking for.
Mobility of such a vast library
Awesome App For All of Your Digital Book Needs
Full disclosure: I LOVE BOOKS! Not the digital kind, but tangible books that I can hold in my hand. I cherish that "old book" smell as much as I do turning back the cover on a hardcover for the first time; with the knowledge that another's fingers have yet to turn its pages and become immersed in the story as I'm about to. I will always adore books.
Having said that? I can still fully appreciate the Kindle app for the convenience of reading on the go. Books are, of course, totally portable as well; However, let's say you're on vacation, or at the beach or park, and want to enjoy a book, or pick up where you left off with one that's at home for that matter. With the convenience of the kindle app you can open the app on your phone/tablet/laptop and download the book, or start a new one.
Suitcases have limited capacity, but the vastness of the internet allows you to access nearly any title with just a few clicks/taps. The customization options in Kindle make it even easier to read while on the go because you can adjust brightness, page color (black, white, sepia), text size, font, margins, etc. You don't have to worry about remembering your page number or having a bookmark handy either because the app allows you to bookmark your page. You can read any book anywhere- a novel, research for that history paper you've been procrastinating on, or the steamy new romance you've been waiting on - without having to worry about carrying them around. I don't know about you guys, but sometimes while on a lunch break I wished that I had brought a book with me (particularly if service is slow at a restaurant) so I'd open the Kindle app and find a book to read. My last positive point here is actually both good and bad... You don't have to worry about book lights or keeping the lamp on and annoying your partner if you're reading a book on your phone/tablet, but the flip side to that is there's less strain on your eyes when reading a hard copy book rather than digital.
There are only two downsides to the app and they're more due to my personal preference rather than anything with the app itself... with the prevalence of digital and audio books I've watched many beloved bookstores begin disappearing, or they have downsized to focus on selling digital. The second issue is that unlike with a physical book in hand you can't really tune everything else out (incoming calls and notifications) and lose yourself in whatever you're reading.
Having said that? I can still fully appreciate the Kindle app for the convenience of reading on the go. Books are, of course, totally portable as well; However, let's say you're on vacation, or at the beach or park, and want to enjoy a book, or pick up where you left off with one that's at home for that matter. With the convenience of the kindle app you can open the app on your phone/tablet/laptop and download the book, or start a new one.
Suitcases have limited capacity, but the vastness of the internet allows you to access nearly any title with just a few clicks/taps. The customization options in Kindle make it even easier to read while on the go because you can adjust brightness, page color (black, white, sepia), text size, font, margins, etc. You don't have to worry about remembering your page number or having a bookmark handy either because the app allows you to bookmark your page. You can read any book anywhere- a novel, research for that history paper you've been procrastinating on, or the steamy new romance you've been waiting on - without having to worry about carrying them around. I don't know about you guys, but sometimes while on a lunch break I wished that I had brought a book with me (particularly if service is slow at a restaurant) so I'd open the Kindle app and find a book to read. My last positive point here is actually both good and bad... You don't have to worry about book lights or keeping the lamp on and annoying your partner if you're reading a book on your phone/tablet, but the flip side to that is there's less strain on your eyes when reading a hard copy book rather than digital.
There are only two downsides to the app and they're more due to my personal preference rather than anything with the app itself... with the prevalence of digital and audio books I've watched many beloved bookstores begin disappearing, or they have downsized to focus on selling digital. The second issue is that unlike with a physical book in hand you can't really tune everything else out (incoming calls and notifications) and lose yourself in whatever you're reading.
Sassy Brit (97 KP) rated Game Players in Books
Jun 5, 2019
When a group of children hiding in their secret den see someone burying drugs in a hole in the ground, they collectively decide to do the right thing – dig it up and take it to their local police station. Unfortunately, before they’ve had time to hand in the drugs, they discover the dead body of a local small-time dealer where the drugs would have been, had they not dug them up.
Eventually they decide to tell the police about the body they’ve found but not that they’ve got the drugs, because they don’t want to be blamed for the death of murdered man. To avoid getting into trouble, and having their secret den taken away from them, the kids make up a story of discovering the body whilst playing a game of hide-and-seek. But of course, kids lying to the police can only get them into more trouble, right?
Are they now responsible for someone’s death? If they hadn’t of meddled with the drugs, would the man still be alive? These are just some of the questions raised in the book Game Players by Anita Waller, which highlights how a group of innocent children get caught up in a major drug dealing racket, and become stuck with a heap of drugs that people are killing for! These guys mean business and they’ll stop at nothing to get their stash back. It’s worth a lot of money.
This is a great book, and I read it super-fast. The children find themselves having to grow up overnight when their childish actions come with deadly serious consequences. This believable story shows how one act of naive kindness can turn their lives upside down as events spiral out of control and their own lives, and those of their families, are put in danger.
The kids were great to read about, as they were really good friends who looked out for each other. I loved how they worked together to get themselves out of trouble, just like those in Stephen King’s The Stand. They’re a team and think they’ll be together forever. Just like kids thinking the hot summer holidays are never-ending. I also enjoyed reading how one boy’s dad was involved in a way which made me dislike him, but when things got really bad, he had a change of heart and stepped up to become the concerned father he should have been all along. This is just one, of many plot threads, which made this book a worthy read.
This is an entertaining and believable thriller, which I found both gripping and incredibly moving. It’s about the true bond of friendship, decisions having consequences and the games people play with their lives. I enjoyed it immensely and will look into reading more of Anita Waller’s books from now on. Superb!
Eventually they decide to tell the police about the body they’ve found but not that they’ve got the drugs, because they don’t want to be blamed for the death of murdered man. To avoid getting into trouble, and having their secret den taken away from them, the kids make up a story of discovering the body whilst playing a game of hide-and-seek. But of course, kids lying to the police can only get them into more trouble, right?
Are they now responsible for someone’s death? If they hadn’t of meddled with the drugs, would the man still be alive? These are just some of the questions raised in the book Game Players by Anita Waller, which highlights how a group of innocent children get caught up in a major drug dealing racket, and become stuck with a heap of drugs that people are killing for! These guys mean business and they’ll stop at nothing to get their stash back. It’s worth a lot of money.
This is a great book, and I read it super-fast. The children find themselves having to grow up overnight when their childish actions come with deadly serious consequences. This believable story shows how one act of naive kindness can turn their lives upside down as events spiral out of control and their own lives, and those of their families, are put in danger.
The kids were great to read about, as they were really good friends who looked out for each other. I loved how they worked together to get themselves out of trouble, just like those in Stephen King’s The Stand. They’re a team and think they’ll be together forever. Just like kids thinking the hot summer holidays are never-ending. I also enjoyed reading how one boy’s dad was involved in a way which made me dislike him, but when things got really bad, he had a change of heart and stepped up to become the concerned father he should have been all along. This is just one, of many plot threads, which made this book a worthy read.
This is an entertaining and believable thriller, which I found both gripping and incredibly moving. It’s about the true bond of friendship, decisions having consequences and the games people play with their lives. I enjoyed it immensely and will look into reading more of Anita Waller’s books from now on. Superb!
Movie Metropolis (309 KP) rated Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016) in Movies
Jun 11, 2019
As average as you can get
The lacklustre box-office performance of Jack Reacher in 2012 seemed to scupper plans for the film to become the first in a new Tom Cruise-led action franchise to rival the likes of Mission Impossible and its mixed critical response only added to its woes.
Fast forward four years and we’ve got the sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is Jack Reacher: Never Go Back the improvement that was so sorely needed and could it act as a catalyst to turn this popular novel series into a proper film franchise?
Investigator Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) springs into action after the arrest of Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), an Army major accused of treason. Suspecting foul play, Jack embarks on a mission to prove that the head of his old unit is innocent. After crossing paths with the law, Reacher must now go on the lam to uncover the truth behind a major government conspiracy that involves the death of U.S. soldiers.
Director Edward Zwick (Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai) shoots the action realistically but even a commanding turn from Tom Cruise can’t save a bland script, so-so special effects and a plot so unoriginal, it would be easy to swap out Cruise for Liam Neeson and call it Taken 4. Or Matt Damon and label it Bourne 6? You get where I’m going with this, right?
It’s all been done so many times before and there are no twists and turns or anything remotely unusual to give the film a USP. Instead, the scriptwriters, of which there are three here, force our two central characters into a game of cat and mouse so lazy, the bad guys show up literally minutes after our heroes, with no explanation whatsoever of how they came to be in the vicinity.
Surely it wouldn’t have been difficult to add some extra exposition into the script. Cyborg baddies with GPS tracking systems implanted into their brains perhaps? I’ll save that idea for another day.
Nevertheless, the action is confidently choreographed with a Halloween parade finale being utilised rather well and Cruise plays the titular role well, despite being 54 this year. However, the supporting cast are drowned out by some horrendous dialogue and a story that doesn’t really know what to do with anyone apart from Jack Reacher himself.
And that really is about it. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is the most satisfactory film of the year by some margin. It’s not terrible by any means and it certainly isn’t fantastic, but it makes for a passable trip to the cinema, though one that you’ll probably have forgotten about by the time you get to your front door. It’s just that middle of the road.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/21/as-average-as-you-can-get-jack-reacher-never-go-back-review/
Fast forward four years and we’ve got the sequel that no-one was really asking for. But is Jack Reacher: Never Go Back the improvement that was so sorely needed and could it act as a catalyst to turn this popular novel series into a proper film franchise?
Investigator Jack Reacher (Tom Cruise) springs into action after the arrest of Susan Turner (Cobie Smulders), an Army major accused of treason. Suspecting foul play, Jack embarks on a mission to prove that the head of his old unit is innocent. After crossing paths with the law, Reacher must now go on the lam to uncover the truth behind a major government conspiracy that involves the death of U.S. soldiers.
Director Edward Zwick (Blood Diamond, The Last Samurai) shoots the action realistically but even a commanding turn from Tom Cruise can’t save a bland script, so-so special effects and a plot so unoriginal, it would be easy to swap out Cruise for Liam Neeson and call it Taken 4. Or Matt Damon and label it Bourne 6? You get where I’m going with this, right?
It’s all been done so many times before and there are no twists and turns or anything remotely unusual to give the film a USP. Instead, the scriptwriters, of which there are three here, force our two central characters into a game of cat and mouse so lazy, the bad guys show up literally minutes after our heroes, with no explanation whatsoever of how they came to be in the vicinity.
Surely it wouldn’t have been difficult to add some extra exposition into the script. Cyborg baddies with GPS tracking systems implanted into their brains perhaps? I’ll save that idea for another day.
Nevertheless, the action is confidently choreographed with a Halloween parade finale being utilised rather well and Cruise plays the titular role well, despite being 54 this year. However, the supporting cast are drowned out by some horrendous dialogue and a story that doesn’t really know what to do with anyone apart from Jack Reacher himself.
And that really is about it. Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is the most satisfactory film of the year by some margin. It’s not terrible by any means and it certainly isn’t fantastic, but it makes for a passable trip to the cinema, though one that you’ll probably have forgotten about by the time you get to your front door. It’s just that middle of the road.
https://moviemetropolis.net/2016/10/21/as-average-as-you-can-get-jack-reacher-never-go-back-review/
Kristy H (1252 KP) rated Little Girl Gone (An Afton Tangler Thriller #1) in Books
Feb 13, 2018
Afton Tangler is halfway up a cold, icy mountain ledge when the call comes in: a three-month old baby, Elizabeth Ann, has vanished, taken from her home in the middle of the night. The little girl's babysitter is in the hospital after being assaulted, and Elizabeth Ann's wealthy parents are frantic. Afton, a family liaison officer for the Minneapolis Police Department, must console the baby's parents, Susan and Richard Darden. Besides her ice climbing hobby, Afton is also an aspiring police officer, so when the lead detective on the case, Max, has her tag along, she does, trying to untangle the weird web of clues that accompanies this sad case. Who was the strange man, pretending to deliver a pizza, who attacked the babysitter? Is he connected to a woman at a doll show that interacted with Susan? Is Richard's recent job switch a factor? Will a ransom call come in? As Afton and Max race to find Elizabeth Ann, the web only thickens, and they become more frantic to find Elizabeth Ann before it's too late.
This was an interesting mystery novel. I won't lie: the writing is wooden and clunky to say the least. It's certainly not the smoothly written thriller of a say a Tana French or Mary Kubica, whose books I've recently read. Further, the plot is really preposterous at times, and it's crazy to watch Afton, who should really be sitting at a desk and chatting with families, out solving crimes, chasing bad guys, and scaling cliffs (seriously). That being said, you can't help develop but an affinity for Ms. Afton Tangler. She's amazingly good at untangling a mystery (a little too good at times), but she's also incredibly plucky and genuine. She's like a Melissa McCarthy character in "Spy" or "Bridesmaids" - she's so herself that you fall for her in spite of yourself.
I also always find it impressive when authors can make a book suspenseful even when we know who "did it" from the beginning. [b:Little Girl Gone|27209410|Little Girl Gone|Gerry Schmitt|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1463571368s/27209410.jpg|47250892] is told from the ever-popular multi-character POV, so we hear from Afton, but also Susan, and several characters related to the crime itself. So while we see the crime unfold and know exactly who took the Elizabeth Ann, Schmitt still does a good job of making the book exciting as Afton and Max attempt to find the little girl and reunite her with her parents. Because of that, plus Afton's tenacious character, I will still give this one 3 stars, despite some of the crazy plot holes and the occasional less than stellar writing.
I received a copy of this book from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you); it is available everywhere as of 07/05/2016.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/justacatandbook">Twitter</a>;
This was an interesting mystery novel. I won't lie: the writing is wooden and clunky to say the least. It's certainly not the smoothly written thriller of a say a Tana French or Mary Kubica, whose books I've recently read. Further, the plot is really preposterous at times, and it's crazy to watch Afton, who should really be sitting at a desk and chatting with families, out solving crimes, chasing bad guys, and scaling cliffs (seriously). That being said, you can't help develop but an affinity for Ms. Afton Tangler. She's amazingly good at untangling a mystery (a little too good at times), but she's also incredibly plucky and genuine. She's like a Melissa McCarthy character in "Spy" or "Bridesmaids" - she's so herself that you fall for her in spite of yourself.
I also always find it impressive when authors can make a book suspenseful even when we know who "did it" from the beginning. [b:Little Girl Gone|27209410|Little Girl Gone|Gerry Schmitt|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1463571368s/27209410.jpg|47250892] is told from the ever-popular multi-character POV, so we hear from Afton, but also Susan, and several characters related to the crime itself. So while we see the crime unfold and know exactly who took the Elizabeth Ann, Schmitt still does a good job of making the book exciting as Afton and Max attempt to find the little girl and reunite her with her parents. Because of that, plus Afton's tenacious character, I will still give this one 3 stars, despite some of the crazy plot holes and the occasional less than stellar writing.
I received a copy of this book from the publisher and Netgalley (thank you); it is available everywhere as of 07/05/2016.
<a href="http://justacatandabookatherside.blogspot.com/">My Blog</a> ~ <a href="https://www.facebook.com/justacatandabook/">Facebook</a>; ~ <a href="https://twitter.com/justacatandbook">Twitter</a>;
Lilyn G - Sci-Fi & Scary (91 KP) rated The Mummy (2017) in Movies
Jun 19, 2018
Blech
The Mummy was a completely awesome movie! Filled with perfectly timed comedy, a strong female heroine, a somewhat sinister Mummy, and great lines! I’m talking, of course, about the 1999 version of The Mummy. The one starring Brendan Fraser and the wonderful Rachel Weisz.
The remake tried to be a great movie and slid in somewhere around “mediocre at best”. As one might expect, this was Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise. (Does the man ever actually try to play someone other than himself? Serious question.) Sofia Boutella is blandly proficient as the scantily clad mummy who couldn’t ooze menace or evil if her life depended on it. Given that we’re supposed to accept that this chick killed her baby half-brother and her father, you’d think there’d be something in the way of evil there. Instead she just comes across as your typical vengeful, wanton female. Annabelle Wallis was about as good as Boutella was. And I did not buy Crowe’s Jekyll/Hyde at all.
Why was there a wet white t-shirt scene in The Mummy? Did not a single person making it go “You know, maybe we should have her put on a different color shirt?” Because it’s not like the wet white t-shirt is a blatant aim to give guys something to beat off to or anything. Between Boutella’s outfit and the “Lookit! Boobies!” of that particular scene, it was obvious that the film crew wasn’t exactly confident of their success in the movie being popular on it’s premise or the actors’ abilities alone.
Now, I do give them credit for the hiring of Sofia Boutella. She looked right for the role. However, why did we have to do the contrast of the evil foreign female against the stereotypical white female again. (Blonde hair, blue eyes, etc. etc. You really can’t get more white.) This is, admittedly, more predominant in my mind since seeing the criticism that Wonder Woman got for the very minor role African Americans played in the film. I couldn’t help but think “Really, how hard would it have been to hire an African American female for Jenny’s role?” And then it would have avoided the white girls vs the other girls thing. But, yeah, no, that’s too difficult a concept for the people making the casting decisions to understand.
(On a lighter note: A blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jenny meant every time she was on screen, I kept expecting Forest Gump to yell for her from off screen.)
The action was fine, with nothing new thrown in. Some of the scenes are recognizable from the better The Mummy. The dialogue was acceptable, but nothing to write home about.
Do yourself a favor and just watch The Mummy movie from 1999. It’s by far the better film experience. This one wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t very good.
The remake tried to be a great movie and slid in somewhere around “mediocre at best”. As one might expect, this was Tom Cruise playing Tom Cruise. (Does the man ever actually try to play someone other than himself? Serious question.) Sofia Boutella is blandly proficient as the scantily clad mummy who couldn’t ooze menace or evil if her life depended on it. Given that we’re supposed to accept that this chick killed her baby half-brother and her father, you’d think there’d be something in the way of evil there. Instead she just comes across as your typical vengeful, wanton female. Annabelle Wallis was about as good as Boutella was. And I did not buy Crowe’s Jekyll/Hyde at all.
Why was there a wet white t-shirt scene in The Mummy? Did not a single person making it go “You know, maybe we should have her put on a different color shirt?” Because it’s not like the wet white t-shirt is a blatant aim to give guys something to beat off to or anything. Between Boutella’s outfit and the “Lookit! Boobies!” of that particular scene, it was obvious that the film crew wasn’t exactly confident of their success in the movie being popular on it’s premise or the actors’ abilities alone.
Now, I do give them credit for the hiring of Sofia Boutella. She looked right for the role. However, why did we have to do the contrast of the evil foreign female against the stereotypical white female again. (Blonde hair, blue eyes, etc. etc. You really can’t get more white.) This is, admittedly, more predominant in my mind since seeing the criticism that Wonder Woman got for the very minor role African Americans played in the film. I couldn’t help but think “Really, how hard would it have been to hire an African American female for Jenny’s role?” And then it would have avoided the white girls vs the other girls thing. But, yeah, no, that’s too difficult a concept for the people making the casting decisions to understand.
(On a lighter note: A blonde-haired, blue-eyed Jenny meant every time she was on screen, I kept expecting Forest Gump to yell for her from off screen.)
The action was fine, with nothing new thrown in. Some of the scenes are recognizable from the better The Mummy. The dialogue was acceptable, but nothing to write home about.
Do yourself a favor and just watch The Mummy movie from 1999. It’s by far the better film experience. This one wasn’t bad, but it certainly wasn’t very good.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Deadpool 2 (2018) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
The Mercenary with a mouth is back with the eagerly awaited arrival of “Deadpool 2”. The films sees the generally well-meaning but highly dysfunctional Deadpool (Ryan Reynolds), back to taking out bad guys as a contract player but also managing his relationship with Vanessa (Morena Baccarin). When an unexpected event sends his life into a freefall, Deadpool tries to find a new purpose with the help of his X-Men associates from the last film who attempt to recruit him into their organization.
His first mission is to defuse an angry and destructive young mutant named Russell (Julian Dennison), which takes an unexpected turn and lands them both in serious trouble.
One would think that would be enough to cause some major life changes for Deadpool but thanks to the arrival of Cable (Josh Brolin), a cyborg soldier from the future; things are about to get much more complicated and intense.
Undaunted, Deadpool opts to form his own league of heroes and aside from Domino (Zazie Beetz); they seem to be as unlucky or dysfunctional as their leader which makes for some very hysterical consequences.
What follows is an action and laugh-laden adventure which brings even more of what made the first film such a success to the audience as the film takes the bawdy action of the first and ups the ante thanks in large part to an expanded budget and cast.
My biggest concern for the film was that with an expanded budget there would be too many characters and an attempt to do far too much with the film. That did play out at times in the beginning as for me, the first film worked so well as they had to let the characters rather than the action and effects carry it and the rapid-fire arrival of so many jokes and creative profanity made repeat viewing of the film necessary to catch everything.
This time out we get elaborate action and chase sequences as well as a much larger cast. At times it seemed as if this would possibly overshadow the characters and story but Reynolds and Director David Leith never let it cross that line.
They also go back to the core elements in the final third of the film which really allows the film to fully connect with the tone of the original film and brings the film home to a satisfying conclusion. What really sold the film for me was the brilliant and very inspired extended scene during the credits which allows Deadpool to “fix” various issues which perfectly captures the irreverent character and the best aspects of the series where the cast is willing to make fun of themselves as well as the larger universe in which their characters exist.
I cannot wait to see what comes next as “DeadPool 2” is another fun outing for the character and something very different from most comic based movies.
http://sknr.net/2018/05/14/deadpool-2-2/
His first mission is to defuse an angry and destructive young mutant named Russell (Julian Dennison), which takes an unexpected turn and lands them both in serious trouble.
One would think that would be enough to cause some major life changes for Deadpool but thanks to the arrival of Cable (Josh Brolin), a cyborg soldier from the future; things are about to get much more complicated and intense.
Undaunted, Deadpool opts to form his own league of heroes and aside from Domino (Zazie Beetz); they seem to be as unlucky or dysfunctional as their leader which makes for some very hysterical consequences.
What follows is an action and laugh-laden adventure which brings even more of what made the first film such a success to the audience as the film takes the bawdy action of the first and ups the ante thanks in large part to an expanded budget and cast.
My biggest concern for the film was that with an expanded budget there would be too many characters and an attempt to do far too much with the film. That did play out at times in the beginning as for me, the first film worked so well as they had to let the characters rather than the action and effects carry it and the rapid-fire arrival of so many jokes and creative profanity made repeat viewing of the film necessary to catch everything.
This time out we get elaborate action and chase sequences as well as a much larger cast. At times it seemed as if this would possibly overshadow the characters and story but Reynolds and Director David Leith never let it cross that line.
They also go back to the core elements in the final third of the film which really allows the film to fully connect with the tone of the original film and brings the film home to a satisfying conclusion. What really sold the film for me was the brilliant and very inspired extended scene during the credits which allows Deadpool to “fix” various issues which perfectly captures the irreverent character and the best aspects of the series where the cast is willing to make fun of themselves as well as the larger universe in which their characters exist.
I cannot wait to see what comes next as “DeadPool 2” is another fun outing for the character and something very different from most comic based movies.
http://sknr.net/2018/05/14/deadpool-2-2/
BackToTheMovies (56 KP) rated The Captor (2019) in Movies
Jun 21, 2019
2019 certainly seems to be the year of Ethan Hawke slaying it in movies! The Kid was a powerhouse performance enough to warrant and the year off but then The Captor is released and once again. Wow. Ethan Hawke only goes and blows the bloody doors off this real-life true story about a bank robbery in Stockholm. This is our The Captor review.
It’s 1973 and Lars Nystrom (Hawke) walks into a bank in Stockholm firing a rifle and takes two staff members hostage. Demanding $1m, a blue Mustang and the release of Gunnar Sorensson (Mark Strong) a famous bank robber. What transpires over the next few hours is beyond belief and it’s difficult to even comprehend that most of this actually happened in real life!
Starring an all-star cast of Hawke, Mark Strong and Noomi Rapace The Captor has cult classic written all over it. Hawke plays this bat shit crazy robber who’s jumped in way above his head. The performances all round not only support Hawke’s center stage dominance but they add depth to the story. We have moments of relaxation in the vaults as character arcs are developed and relationships formed. It really is a film that’s all guns blazing one minute, hilarious comedic moments the next and then tones down and becomes level headed the next.
Director and screenwriter Robert Budreau never over embellish any scenes or characters. We really see both sides of Nystrom’s (Hawke) motives and back story. A man so up front with bravado when push comes to shove but a character of layers with a vulnerable and kind-nature hiding inside. The latter of those personality traits leads to one of the captors in question falling for her captor. Stockholm Syndrome explains this very phenomenon and in the US the movie is actually titled ‘Stockholm’ before being renamed to The Captor here in the UK.
Mark Strong rocks the double denim as Gunnar Sorensson and acts like a brother of sorts to Hawke’s Nystrom. It’s great watching the scenes between the police throughout as they scramble to try and meet Nystrom’s ludicrous demands. Gunnar’s intentions are never clear or really explained throughout. He’s just happy to be out of jail if albeit with an ulterior motive.
I feel as thou the direction of the movie is trying to put us in the shoes of the hostages. The very same hostages that in real life never testified against their captors. They’re portrayed as the rebellious force with good motives whilst the police are portrayed as the bad guys who want to make them pay. Noomi Rapace plays the emotional anchor of the movie and the bond that develops between her and Nystrom is palpable.
“This movie has cult classic written all over it”
There’s no psychological explanation about the phenom that is Stockholm Syndrom it’s just a routine, tootin good time!
https://backtothemovies.com/the-captor-review-a-cult-classic-ethan-hawke-at-his-finest/
It’s 1973 and Lars Nystrom (Hawke) walks into a bank in Stockholm firing a rifle and takes two staff members hostage. Demanding $1m, a blue Mustang and the release of Gunnar Sorensson (Mark Strong) a famous bank robber. What transpires over the next few hours is beyond belief and it’s difficult to even comprehend that most of this actually happened in real life!
Starring an all-star cast of Hawke, Mark Strong and Noomi Rapace The Captor has cult classic written all over it. Hawke plays this bat shit crazy robber who’s jumped in way above his head. The performances all round not only support Hawke’s center stage dominance but they add depth to the story. We have moments of relaxation in the vaults as character arcs are developed and relationships formed. It really is a film that’s all guns blazing one minute, hilarious comedic moments the next and then tones down and becomes level headed the next.
Director and screenwriter Robert Budreau never over embellish any scenes or characters. We really see both sides of Nystrom’s (Hawke) motives and back story. A man so up front with bravado when push comes to shove but a character of layers with a vulnerable and kind-nature hiding inside. The latter of those personality traits leads to one of the captors in question falling for her captor. Stockholm Syndrome explains this very phenomenon and in the US the movie is actually titled ‘Stockholm’ before being renamed to The Captor here in the UK.
Mark Strong rocks the double denim as Gunnar Sorensson and acts like a brother of sorts to Hawke’s Nystrom. It’s great watching the scenes between the police throughout as they scramble to try and meet Nystrom’s ludicrous demands. Gunnar’s intentions are never clear or really explained throughout. He’s just happy to be out of jail if albeit with an ulterior motive.
I feel as thou the direction of the movie is trying to put us in the shoes of the hostages. The very same hostages that in real life never testified against their captors. They’re portrayed as the rebellious force with good motives whilst the police are portrayed as the bad guys who want to make them pay. Noomi Rapace plays the emotional anchor of the movie and the bond that develops between her and Nystrom is palpable.
“This movie has cult classic written all over it”
There’s no psychological explanation about the phenom that is Stockholm Syndrom it’s just a routine, tootin good time!
https://backtothemovies.com/the-captor-review-a-cult-classic-ethan-hawke-at-his-finest/